The Palatka daily news. (Palatka, Fla.) 1884-1888, 1887-04-21

The following is the full text of the
letter from ex-senator Mclleekin. of Put
nam County, to Senator Delano, of No-
la ia, which was read before the Senate
and referred to- the Committee on Agri-
culture:
MCSIEEKIS, FLA. April Il. 1887.
DEAR SENATOR wish To trouble you
a little, which hope you will pardon. |
would very much like To see a law passed
to- prevent hogs being turned out on the
public, for these reasons 1st. Ii costs
the people of the State who cultivate
the soil very heavy in erecting fences to
keep the hogs from destroying their
crops. | think | ann safe in saying that
these hog-prOOf fences cost agriculture
each year ten times as much as all the
hogs in the State are worth. 2d. The
custom of letting hogs run at large Is of
no benefit to the hog interest The most
successful hog raist,rs are those who en-
close their hogs, pasture and feed them.
| will take the section in which | live
for an example. All the hogs i'll this sec
ton, if sold at a fair price, would not
bring $50. but the fences which those
who cultivate the soil are compelled To
build to protect their crops against this $50
worth of hogs, will cost $500 or more.
Why should this useless and un jUst bur
den be kept on agriculture? If the owners
of hogs We're compelled by law to keep
their hogs enclosed, which would be-
Just, the hog interest would be benefited
and a burdenSOme tax of several hundred
Thousand dollars would. at one sweep, he.
taken from the agricultural interest of
this State. Ii Is not so burdensome to
protect crops against cattle. and cattle
may run at large with benefit to that in
terest. The time will come, though
when cattle owners will be required to
enclose their cattle. but agriculture can
wait awhile for that: but il is a useless
and heavy burden ON agriculture To re-
qIIIre the farmers to fence against hogs
Ii would be an act of Justice. and a great
relief To the agricultural interest of this
State, To pass a law compelling the
owners of hogs To keep them enclosed.
III these views meet Your appreciation. |
hope You will endeavor to effect the
necessary legislation for that end.
In regard To the Railroad Commission.
| wish To say that believe that it is not
-
laws fixing maximum charge-mileage
for passengers, a maximum freight
schedule for the principal articles of
transportation-and let this maximum
be- reasonable. both To- the railroads and
people. and what IL reasonable NAV he
arrived at 10y committee appointed for
that purpose after consultation with rail
road officials rs we'll as commission
could do. | think this would give all
the benefit that a commission would
give AMI save the people "A heavy eX-
pense in supporting commission.
which would probably require some So
600 annually in salaries. etc. Besides
the railroads would know exactly what
: To- meet. and would not be deferred from
railroad building. not knowing what
difficulties might br placed in their way
by an unfriendly and probably an ire
sponsible commission. \ general law
fixing reasonable rates. and fOrbIddlng
discrimination against places and per
SONS. excepting the necessary race dis
elimination with passengers. enforced
10y the courts. rs all laws are enforced,
IL appears To me will answer the purpose
AT present even better than a railroad
commission. The true policy for us IL
To encourage railroad building. but To
secure fair dealing for the people
hope You will pardon the liberty
take IN imposing these views ON You.
Putnam. YOU know. IL represented by
the other side.
Yours truly.
F. NJ McMFEKIS.